Re: [PATCH v2 RFC 1/3] MAINTAINERS: Add "R:" designated-reviewers tag

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 13:12 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 12:03:07PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 08:35 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Paul Walmsley also noted the need for patch
> > > submitters to know who the key reviewers are and suggested adding an
> > > "R:" tag to the MAINTAINERS file to record this information on a
> > > per-subsystem basis.
> > []
> > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > []
> > > @@ -70,6 +70,8 @@ Descriptions of section entries:
> > >  
> > >  	P: Person (obsolete)
> > >  	M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain>
> > > +	R: Designated reviewer, who should be CCed on patches,
> > > +	   format: FullName <address@domain>
> > >  	L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
> > >  	W: Web-page with status/info
> > >  	Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site
> > 
> > Perhaps the M: and R: roles should be more fully
> > described here.
> > 
> > The R: entry description doesn't need commas.
> > 
> > Maybe something like:
> > 	M: Maintainer (to:) FullName <address@domain>
> > 	R: Reviewer   (cc:) FullName <address@domain>
> 
> This is arguably better organized, but I need to keep my focus on adding
> the designated reviewer.  I am not in a position to undertake a rewrite
> of the MAINTAINER file preamble at this point.

That's silly, you're adding the "R" entry.
Add a proper description for it.

> > You might as well send the get_maintainer update with this
> > series too.
> 
> Interesting...  Who is the maintainer for get_maintainer?  ;-)

Some numbskull just signed up for that.

He suggests you keep all the patches that add
support for this "R: reviewer" feature together.